Bucks May Face Air Quality Penalty County Is Part Of Metropolitan Area Where Ozone Levels Exceed Standards

June 15, 1987|by CHUCK AYERS, The Morning Call

The dilemma of ozone: In some places there doesn't seem to be enough, and in other places, like Bucks County, there seems to be too much, at least according to the standards of the Clean Air Act.

While the gas is widely familiar as a layer in the upper atmosphere providing a shield from harmful ultraviolet rays, it is generally less known that too much ozone is considered bad, leading to lung cancer and a variety of respiratory ailments.

The Clean Air Act prescribes standards for various matter in the air, particularly ozone and carbon monoxide, and sets a deadline of Dec. 31 this year for regions across the United States to meet those standards or face stiff penalties that could halt development, cut off federal highway funds and mean the loss of federal assistance for the construction of sewage treatment facilities, according to Barbara Paley, legislative representative for the National Association of Counties.

As the law currently reads, the Environmental Protection Agency must begin imposing these sanctions on regions that have failed to meet ambient air- quality standards more than three times over a three year period.

"If a region exceeds the standards four times, they are in what is called non-compliance or non-attainment," said Paley.

Bucks County, fairly or not, is in the Philadelphia, Wilmington, Trenton, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area, which is considered in non-attainment for ozone levels that exceed 0.12 parts per million.

"This is a non-attainment area for ozone, and therefore if they do not reach attainment by December1987, the metropolitan statistical area will be subject to sanctions," said Paley, who has been lobbying Congress to extend the deadlines.

Without an extension or some revision to the law, she said, EPA has no choice but to mandate municipalities enact a moratorium on construction within the non-attainment area and terminate highway moneys to be spent within the region's boundaries. Those are mandatory sanctions that the agency must impose by law, she said.

In addition, EPA has the discretion to cut off water pollution control funds, used for such things as construction of sewage treatment plants, according to Paley.

Though she conceded EPA is not likely to impose sanctions immediately on all the regions at once, Paley said, "The law is such that they don't have a lot of room for maneuvering. EPA has very little statutory flexibility."

Enforcement is likely to begin with the most serious offenders like Los Angeles or New York, said Paley, adding, however, that "One by one they are going to start coming down on counties and ban new construction."

The local region certainly is not alone, said Paley. Sixty-two million people live in regions with carbon monoxide problems as identified by EPA, and 80 million people in regions with excessive ozone levels, according to Paley.

And though it is unlikely that EPA will immediately turn to Bucks County on Jan. 1 and say, "No more building," there is a provision in the law that allows private citizens to bring suit against municipalities to stop any development that can be proven to exacerbate the ozone problem, Paley said.

"If a local community group doesn't want a particular shopping center as a contributor to pollution, they can go to court and argue that it should be stopped," she said.

As an example, she offered the case of a "completely benign plant" that doesn't spew any emissions into the air but could employ 2,000 people. The construction of that facility could be stopped, she said, by arguing the emissions from the vehicles driven to work by the employees adds to the ozone pollution.

"Automobile exhaust is a large contributor to the problem by expelling volatile organic compounds that are a precursor to ozone and that then mix with other elements to form ozone. Controlling automobile traffic is a big part of reaching attainment," she said.

Some, like U.S. Rep. Peter H. Kostmayer D-8th, feel the chances are good that Congress will extend the deadlines. Others, like Paley, point out that numerous attempts have been made to change the law since the last amendment to the Clean Air Act in 1977, but all have been unsuccessful.

"There have been so many attempts to amend the Clean Air Act and they have all been for naught," she said. Much of the reason is that some in Congress want to gut the law while others want it strengthened, making it very difficult to reach a compromise, according to Paley.

"Everyone seems to have their own agenda," she lamented.

"We understand reaching attainment is important, but we're asking for more time, a realistic amount of time, to reach attainment," she said.

So far, though, no bill has been put in the hopper on the house side and a bill is pending but has not been introduced on the floor of the Senate, she said.